Skip to main content

About your Search

20130121
20130129
STATION
CSPAN2 6
MSNBCW 6
CSPAN 5
MSNBC 5
CNNW 4
CNN 3
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
CNBC 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
LINKTV 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WETA 1
WRC (NBC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 51
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 51 (some duplicates have been removed)
, ironically, if john mccain and lindsey graham and others had joined with george w. bush, this could have been done in 2007. >> right. what john mccain sort of didn't say but implied was what has changed about this issue? it's simple. november 6th, the 2012 general election. the overall share of republican votes was -- people that voted for republicans is white. 11% nonwhite. it is -- that is an untenable -- we saw in 2012, and it will only get worse if they continue to lose 70% plus of the hispanic vote. that's what's changed here. republicans broadly recognize it. the question is jose touched on it, the path to citizenship. that is the piece that is always the one that conservative republicans said we will not do this. we are validating illegal behavior, no matter what we do. now there are some republicans on board. marco rubio, john mccain, lindsey graham saying, look, this has to be in the proposal. can they rally republicans in the house and senate behind the political necessity of putting immigration reform behind them with a path to sit sfwlenship or not? that seems to me to be the rub.
, george w. bush. another poll shows since president obama was re-elected, just a third of voters think he has been more bipartisan. but the majority, 55% say he's been more confrontational. does this mean nothing can really get done that's meaningful in washington to solve our nation's national debt and help the economy? we have a former white house political director under president george w. bush and a former chief of staff to west virginia senator joe mansion. >> great to be here. >> eric: matt, let me start with you. how do we get here? >> well, you know, i think about the president i served, george w. bush. when he came to office, he really was concerned about trying to if i understand a way to reach across the aisle because clearly bill clinton left the presidency with high numbers. he worked with ted kennedy. he worked with democrats and signature domestic policy issues and then 9/11 happened and the wars occurred. really, the nation polarized again, right versus left. i don't think we have come out of that. obama inherited that. but he talked about bridging that and governing in a
of the george w. bush administration. this brings me to another critically important part of our book, which is how the islamic republic of iran has become the biggest that issue of american mistakes and are ongoing decline in the middle east. in our book, we lay out how by pursuing a foreign policy and building a domestic political order that attracts publics, the islamic republic of iran has been able to take an impeach of american mistakes, to improve its own position dramatically. the key to the islamic republic successes has been that beyond the shift in the distribution of power, who has power in the middle east is a detailed earlier, something even more important is happening and that is the middle east will power itself is changing. it is now increasingly less defined by hard military capabilities for the united states has a clear advantage in the islamic republic of iran is relatively positioned and more defined in terms of the balance of influence are the islamic republic of iran has real unique advantages. as we explained in our book, the islamic republic is encouraging and taken
not just idiosyncratic, ideologically-generated products of the george w. bush administration. as we describe in our book, these stem from a much deeper source that cuts across both democratic and republican administrations, and it's something we describe as the united states, essentially, giving in to a post-cold war temptation to act as an imperial power in the middle east. and it is this imperial turn in america's middle east policies pursued with very little regard for realities on the ground in the middle east that have proven not just quixotic, but deeply damaging to american interests. as a candidate back in twaipt, now-president obama then seemed to really understand this. he talked about it courageously during the campaign. he pledged to not just withdraw american troops from iraq, but to change what he called the american mindset that had gotten us into the strategic mistake of invading iraq in the first place. he pledged to really change america's middle east policies. but instead the obama administration has pursued the same sorts of policies as its predecessors, the same
down at all in the last four years. >> let's go to other presidents george w. bush, clinton. what will their unemployment numbers. >> you can look at those numbers president bush got hit by economic crisis. increased toward his popularity. president clinton very popular his unemployment numbers were extremely low. you can see the correlation. reagan's number interestingly enough 7.3 percent it was high. it came down it was much higher closer to 10 percent he was re-elected. his started at 3.5 it went up to almost 5. even though he was reelected in a land slide he was not popular because he wasn't likeable. wasn't that popular. >> you say there's a direct popularity in unemployment numbers and popularity. >> the trajectory of unemployment. if you bring it down your popularity goes up almost inversely. the other way around. even if you have a low number to start with if you go up your popularity goes down. >> those are the popularity numbers. talk about the national debt at the start of a second term for president obama. >> epic crisis proportions. what was interesting about the pea
baker and george h.w. bush nsx 70 hageman of the world's nations. this subset can do that, we have seen a completely different scene and that is what i would describe as the 20 armors and three libraries and they've got about a dozen fires popping up here in different parts of the world. and oliver sudden, you have people who don't have -- a lot of people in congress who don't have the previous reference has basically come to the conclusion that the world is change and they really can't afford, nor do we have the public support for global engagement. when you go back home intact to people back home, it literally is like saying you need to diet and lose a lot of weight and i'll get a haircut or not solve the problem. the amount of foreign aid in person is shrinking to the point where it's relatively insignificant compared to the whole. yet the will to support that going forward into the event step out and say well, we are to be more engaged here or we can do more here or these are the functions that are working, it's hard to get public support for that. it's hard to get congressional sup
was tweeting. yes and no. politically, republicans distance themselves from george w. bush because it was the thing to do. numbers do not lie. he became very unpopular. parties do not have to embrace figures and politicians to become unpopular. my view is that a lot of distress over bush's domestic agenda from which they fled in 2005. it had been an ancillary result of failure to defend iraq and have a favorable recognition. >> what might have been a successful policy agenda? >> i think the entire country stopped listening to president bush which would be good for the country when it lost faith that he was managing the war effectively. he found it more difficult to get hearings on some of the issues. a lot of people on the right to it came at bush on a lot of these domestic issues. they were feeling extremely distressed about what was going on in the war and did not want to turn on the war. we have troops in the field. this seems like a noble endeavor. they were angry at him for throwing them on the defensive for the prosecution of the war. as a result of the republican party getti
the attendees. but neither president george w. bush nor george h.w. bush were in washington today. the president's arrival was greeted with applause and the lawmakers praised one another in bipartisan toasts and gift exchanges. speaker of the house john boehner presented flags to the first family and appealed for renewed political cooperation. >> we gather in the old hall to better hear one another >> ifill: moments later president obama echoed that appeal for cooperation >> i recognize that democracy is not always easy. and i recognize there are profound differences in this room. but i just want to say thank you for your service and i want to thank your families for their service because regardless of our political persuasions and perspectives i know that all of us serve because we believe that we can make america for future generations. and i'm confident that we can act at this moment in a way that makes a difference. >> ifill: and before they left the building, the group paused to look at the bus bust of dr. martin luther king, jr. that sits under the capital rotunda. then back into the cold
party over the past four years since george w. bush left town is roger els. he's run the party, he's run the conservative movement. when roger els decides she's not worth the trouble, then that means that conservatism's moving in a new direction. i talked about what happened this weekend at "the national review" institute's talk. i was really surprised. really surprised by what i heard. and heartened, whether it was bill kristol or john hatoritz. also scott walker who is doing really well up in wisconsin. and all the republicans got up there, and they were saying the same thing. we've got to stop being the stupid party. we've been saying here for six months, we have got to -- and john, i thought, had one of the best points, that we have stifled debate. the conservative movement has stifled debate. and if you go out and you dare to stand out in a crowd, whether it's on taxes or regulations or in the past on immigration, you were completely shunned from the party. finally there's an understanding we've got to grow the party. what we've been saying for quite frankly for years and getting at
, sir. >> thank you. >> critics of the court's decision point to the fact that president george w. bush made 141 recess appointments under the same circumstances that the court said were unconstitutional in this case, the court recognizing that republican and democrat presidents have used this said it wasn't persuaded by that, but rather by the text of the constitution itself. now that the pentagon has lifted the ban on women in combat, oppons argue we could have problems with cohesion and combat readiness. it was a hot topic on the sunday morning shows. steve centanni has more. >> reporter: some say women are not strong enough for combat roles. others say they have proven themselves time and time again. it's official, women will be able to serve alongside men, opening up doors to advancement, along the military chain of command. outgoing defense secretary leon panetta signed that order last week. but many insist, this is a basic question of physical ability. >> i think the evidence is clear that combat effectiveness when women have put in those kine of demanding roles, they begin to br
presence put together by jim baker and george h. w. bush and the success in the engagement of it. but subsequent to that, we have seen a completely different scene. that is what i would describe as three alarmers and two alarmers. we about a dozen fires popping up here in different parts of the world within all of a sudden you have people who don't have the -- a lot of people in congress who don't have the previous reference have basically come to the conclusion that the world has changed and we can't afford nor do we have the public support for global open gaugement. -- engagement. when you talk to people back home and you say why do we give so much foreign aid? it is literally like saying, you know, you need to diet and lose a lot of weight and you get a haircut and solve the problem. the amount of foreign aid and presence now is shrinking to the point where it's relatively insignificant compared to it. but yet the will to support that going forward and even step out and say well we ought to be more engaged here or do more here or these are the functions that are working. it's
with us. >> thank you. >> former president george w. bush and his father, former president george h.w. bush, aren't attending this inaugural. president -- former president bill clinton and jimmy carter are. we are waiting to see president clinton. stand by for that. also taking a closer look at the downside of winning another four years of the white house. it doesn't always go so well. the second-term curse, as some call it. that's coming up as well. first, though, inaugural flashback. >> let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. >> we all remember the phrase the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. but even more important than the phrase was the whole attitude that fdr had. he projected optimism and projected forward movement. people felt that's the mystery of leadership, that somehow the depression they were suffering, they weren't going to be alone anymore. they had a leader who was going to take care of it. when you have diabetes... your doctor will say get smart about your weight. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they h
and that the united states is not engaged. >> look at george w. bush. in 2000 he said he would have a restrained, humble foreign policy. then 9/11 hit. and now we've been dealing with wars for over a decade. we have already made reference to it while the chinese have been investing in africa. we've been dropping bombs in iraq. we are now in afghanistan. 12 years in. $2 billion a week. our defense budget keeps exploding. so an iranian crisis comes at the absolute worst time for this country. >> that's what i was saying early on. >> on so many points. >> things could change dramatically this year. >> richard and i have talked about this a lot. in search of a metaphor, have i been thinking about the islamic role in africa and the middle east, think of it size a large, very dry forest after years of drought. and a lightning strike anywhere, which is unanticipated, starts a brush fire. and then it goes across. we just saw what happened in algeria. what's going on in syria at the moment. and we are not dealing state-to-state. there's an entirely new set of rules for dealing with that critical part of
director. before that, the president could appoint anyone he wanted. so when president george w. bush nominated michael sullivan, it looked like an easy path, but he couldn't get a vote in a republican-controlled senate. >> did i ever think for a moment my nomination would be held up by a senator from idaho as related to one firearm licensed dealer? no. i didn't. >> idaho senator larry craig along with two other republican, all staunch supporters of the nra, held up sullivan's nomination, but it wasn't the nra's hands at work. it was about one local idaho gun seller's dispute with the atf. even silver himself said the nra didn't derail him. >> i didn't get any sense at all that the industry was opposed to my nomination. nor even the nra. >> when president obama took office, the senate just sat on his first nominee, andrew traver, even conservatives like house republican darrell issa called for action. >> andrew traver, who i believe is the 2010, november 2010 dezinate, should in fact be given an up or down vote. should in fact be given an opportunity to be confirmed. >> but republican
washington, thomas jefferson, abraham lincoln and teddy roosevelt and george w. bush. >> that's what i'm saying. >> i think george w. bush. maybe fdr. >> stature, yeah. >> two roosevelts is confusing. >> maybe. i have to think about it and announce it tomorrow. we will be at the nationals games and spring training coming up very, very soon. thanks very much for that. >> sure. >> a prominent republican not mincing words saying his party needs to stop being stupid. they are meeting in north carolina. what they can do to rebound and remake their brand. would you take it? well, there is. [ male announcer ] it's called ocuvite. a vitamin totally dedicated to your eyes, from the eye care experts at bausch + lomb. as you age, eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. now that's a pill worth taking. [ male announcer ] ocuvite. help protect your eye health. [ male announcer ] when we built the cadillac ats from the ground up to be the world's best sport sedan... ♪ ...pe
. george w. bush got 62 million votes in the 2004 election and conservatives said he had a mandate. barack obama got 62 million votes in the two -- 2012 election, and conservatives started a secessionist movement. but the obama campaign took it to them and made a difference in the end. they helped create a new electorate, a coalition of concerned and they turned it out on election day. our two political parties are separate and not equal. the percentage of republicans who are white has remained fairly steady since 2000 at about 87%. the percentage of democrats who are white in contrast has dropped from 64% in 2000 to 55% now. independents have gone from 79% to 67% white since 2000. the depth of republican dependence on white voters explains a lot about the recent election. not least about its outcome. republican efforts to suppress minority voters back fired big time. [applause] in florida alone, 266,000 more hispanics voted than in 2008. similarly in ohio, 209,000 more blacks voted than in 2008. overall, while romney received 59% of the white vote, all hot -- obama -- omaha? obama got 93%
is effectively following the policy that george w. bush did beforeha beforehand. going forward, i think israelis -- on the he them will say can they do this? i tend to subscribe to the view that a healthy relationship between them and the u.s. is going to have to be fungal. but i also agree with the view that obama is unlikely to take that action in the near term 37. >> david, last question. speaking of north africa, while we've got you, the latest on the algerian situation seems -- the information still is becoming to us not this any real sort of clarified way. what happens now? do you think president obama will have to address a new approach to africa? >> the u.s. has been building in north africa for at least a decade, in toerchls trying to build up the ministry of mali, particularly the algerian army doesn't heed to a -- yeah, that's for sure. it could be weeks, months, years. thank you so much both for your time. stay with us. straight ahead, we'll have a look at travel casts across the continent. we'll be right back. ♪ [ male announcer ] how do you turn an entrepreneur's dream... ♪ int
choosing to be with his father former president george h.w. bush who recently left the hospital after bronchitis and persistent cough and fever. 2012 mitt romney will not be here. it's not uncommon forerunners up to be no shows. michael dukakis skipped herbert walker bush's and mondale was a no show at the second inaugural in 85 which is the last time the constitutionally required date fell on a sunday and a second ceremonial oath was done. >> 40s tomorrow and showers in the afternoon perhaps flurries for folks going to the ball at president obama's second inaugural. carl cameron, fox news. >>> thank you. still ahead the uncertain future of gun. >> the president's second term. stay with us. ÷÷ >> look at that. these beautiful shots of washington are one of the major up sides of the events going on here. not only do you get to see the country come together and celebrate our democracy but boy oh boy the capitol never looked better. much of the world is following the deadly terrorist scenes that happened in algeria. the death toll expect to do climb in the coming days. >> algerian se
is more self-aware than i perhaps thought he was on this. he's been looking at george w. bush's early part of the second term. but the question is what are they going to do about this? they do have a lot of things on their plate with gun control. how much are they going to push this? senate democrats, as you've been saying all morning, are their biggest problem here. >> can you talk about that? because i heard john barrasso, a republican leader in the senate, talk about, gosh, a large number of senate democrats that are running in states where barack obama got below 45%. >> it's tough for them. >> democrats are running in republican territory two years from now in a lot of these senate races, right? >> no question. and a lot of these issues, obviously like on gun control and things are things that these senate democrats don't want to talk about at all. the re-election prospects -- i mean, it's too early to say who's going to be controlling the senate after 2014, but democrats will have an uphill climb. you look at senator kay hagen from north carolina. she has a tough re-election fight on
. that is a really good question. i don't know -- the relationship between america and george w. bush was very solid. my mind drifted. your question was the israelis. i am sorry. time for a refill on my coffee. many, many discussions with the germans relative to their position, relative to our position and the israeli issue. public sentiment in germany as a whole is strongly for a reconciliation for the palestinians, yeah overlying all of that is the residue of the holocaust. i think i can say this. i have a private discussion with the foreign minister on this topic and it had to do with iran and the nuclear threat to israel and the position germany was taking relative to that. i was questioning where they might be should there be a real threat or attack on israel. he said you know that that is not what the public would want us to do but given the holocaust we have no choice but to be there in support of israel. we cannot stand by and let another holocaust take place. so those decades of remorse and guilt over the holocaust dictates policy relative to support for israel even though the public now de
% in 2000 and he lost. george w. bush proved the point. the republicans need to get about 40% or more to win a race for president. this isn't just about the presidency. look at a couple of senate races from 2012 right here. in the state of florida, democrats nearly 6 in 10 latino votes. in virginia, 62%. in arizona, 74%. we can go state, by state, by state. democrats sometimes above 60% in the latino vote. you look at the demographics. republicans can't sustain themselves. let's look at the house races. in 2012, 68%. again, nearly 7 in 10 latinos vote democratic. that's matching the numbers from 2008. 70% 7 70%. in 2004, it was 66%. yes, there are policy questions. senator mccain was honest enough to say, a lot of this being dictated by election results. >> the senate looks like they're working on a bipartisan way for comprehensive immigration reform. it's moving along in the senate. what about the house of representatives? >> i wouldn't get too far out ahead of yourself and say this will pass the house but there is clear changes under way. number one, here's the statement from lamar smith,
publication. john dickerson was credited with being the guy who knocked george w. bush off his heels the most times during his presidency. it's not surprising to me, though, that there is a conflict of interest here. do we remember during the election when there were reporters caught off mic before mitt romney made his statement? cbs news reporter, jan crawford, was one of those reporters. so clearly there is a problem at cbs of there being biased in their reporting. but as we've seen throughout the years, it's not surprising. >> steve: so this is clearly, in your estimation, an example, glaring example of liberal media bias? >> i think it is. and at least with mr. dickerson, he is honest about, in his biothat he's work for slate and the cbs political director. but -- >> steve: how do you do both? >> that's the question. i mean, if cbs is going to portray themselves as a middle of the road, unbiased news source, then it seems a little strange that you would have someone who is writing regularly for a far left publication, as the political director. i think that we saw that with the election r
over how to deal with the george w. bush tax cuts. the house wanted them all extended for everybody. democrats are never on board. president obama was never going to be on board with the idea. so john boehner struggled in that situation, even coming up with an alternative plan for extending tax breaks for anyone making less than $1 million a year. he had to pull from the courthouse. so that was. a was. the next day, he also -- not the next day. excuse me, on january 1, they came back and finally agreed to raise tax rates for those incomes of people making $400,000 a year. that was a tough bill and proposal for him to put forward to, just because taxes went up at the end of the day. the next day he came back and decided to not have a vote on the sandy relief package. that made house lawmakers angry in the northeast. governor chris christie of new jersey also had some tough words for him. he pulled the proposal because conservative republicans said the bill was loaded with pork with projects not related to the storm and they should've gone through the normal appropriations process. a
to raise the debt limit under george w. bush who was president then, barak obama said can't do it. sorry. it would be unpatriotic. >> he said america has a debt problem. i intend to -- >> steve: here we are on the precipice of his second term. do we imagine that anything is going to be different than the first term where he ran up the tab? >> no. i think that's pretty clear and if you look at the national debt from president to president, bush was a big spender. got it up to 7 trillion. but obama at 16.4 trillion and at this inauguration people are saying, no, he's not a spender. it's all bush. >> steve: of course. >> this is unsustainable. this is the big crisis of our time. >> steve: what's the statute of limitations on blaming bush run? >> never. there is no statute of limitations on murder or blaming bush. >> steve: all right. john stossel. check him out tonight on the fox business channel at 9:00 p.m. eastern time. thank you very much. all right. straight ahead, michelle malkin is coming up and says our kids are getting dumber and the president is to blame for lowering our standards
to be asked yesterday. i'm not sure we got really to the core. but i will say, carl, if you think george w. bush didn't have calls for his impeachment, we need to get you on google a little more often. >> not in the congress. a few. >> before we get to women in combat, also, no matter what, rand paul was bringing up a point. you may not have liked the way he brought it up, but if an ambassador in a hot zone cannot communicate with the secretary of state on the issue of security, there's something to be looked at. that's a big problem. >> there's a legitimate congressional investigation here. all i'm saying is that the notion that we have to put everything into a wildly partisan and ideological context instead of real fact finding is a failure of our politics. and this is one more failure of our politics instead of a reasoned investigation. >> i agree with carl. >> it's time to end the political theater and get to some really important fact finding. >> but as congresswoman harman said, it is, in fact, theater. do you remember when the democrats made condoleezza rice read the title on the me
%. that ties the highest ever with george w. bush in the fourth year of his presidency it was also 76%. >> this is not a president who is uniting the country. frankly i think the last election shows he doesn't feel he needs to. he has got a hardened constituenciy. voting public in any case you watched his speech. on monday here is what i am doing if you don't like it, tough there. there was one passing line about reach. and even that wasn't. >> he said the word together a lot. together we move forward. together. certainly republicans after hearing it said that it felt like he had drawn a line in the sand for very progressive ideas most progressive they had heard in decades this has been the theme of the administration past year. can't get it through congress go by constitutional order. this constitutional thing is silly. we have agenda and we will enact it whether you like it or not. >> ronald reagan once said government is the problem. so is the current president doing the opposite in trying to expand government. lots of people talked about that after his inaugural address as well. w
that decision immediately. i support ronald reagan when he sent troops into -- grenada. i support george h w bush when he said troops into panama. i supported president clinton when he did what was needed to be done in kosovo and bosnia. in this instance, the president behaved in that tradition. >> the constitution has no exceptions for when you're having a tough time or when people disagree with you and you go ahead and do it. you were early 1970's, critical of the bombing in cambodia. you felt it was not authorized by congress. has your opinion changed? how is it different than libya? >> boarded my opinion -- nor did my opinion change about vietnam. >> is cambodia different than libya >? >> yes it is different. >> the constitution does not give this kind of latitude to sometimes go to war and sometimes not go to war. barack obama was explicit. people think or he and paul did like anything about barack obama. i like his forthrightness when he said, no president should unilaterally go to war. >> i respect that. you can be absolutist. it does not work in some instances when 10,000 people are
supported ronald reagan when he sent troops out. i supported george h. w. bush when he sent troops to panama. i supported president clinton when against the will of the congress, he did what was needed to be done in bosnia, closet vow, and so forth. and in this particular instance, i think the president behaviored in that tradition. >> i would argue that the constitution has no exceptions for when you're having a tough time or people disagree with you that you go ahead and do it. >> in the early 1970s affiliate vietnam you were critical of the bombing in cambodia. i think you felt it wasn't authorized by congress. has your opinion changed about the bombing in cambodia? how is cambodia different than libya? >> nor did my opinion change or has it ever altered about the war itself where i don't believe, and i argued that. >> was cambodia different than libya? >> yeah, it was. it was an extension of the war being prosecuted without the involvement of congress after a number of years. that's very different. >> length of time. but similar circumstances bombing campaign unthorszed by congress. the
on it immediately. i supported ronald reagan when he sent troops into grenada. i supported george h.w. bush when he sent troops into panama. i supported president clinton, when, against the will of the congress, he did what was needed to be done in kosovo and bosnia and so forth. in this case, i think the president has behaved in that tradition. >> i would argue the constitution doesn't have an exception -- that when you are having tough times, the constitution says that you just go ahead and do it. after vietnam, you were quite critical of the bombing in cambodia because you felt that it was not authorized by congress. has your opinion changed about the bombing in cambodia? how is cambodia different from libya? >> my attitude has not changed about vietnam itself. >> what about cambodia? >> it was the extension of a war prosecuted without the involvement of congress after a number of years. that is very different. >> length of time, but similar circumstances. and obama campaign and authorized by congress. it is not this kind of latitude to sometimes go to war and to sometimes not go to war. i thoug
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 51 (some duplicates have been removed)